Beach users’ aesthetic and economic evaluation of a “minor change” to the hard engineering coastal defences at Wiseman’s Bridge, Pembrokeshire, Wales

Abstract

This study evaluated the visual impact of the new hard engineering coastal defences at Wiseman's Bridge, Pembrokeshire, Wales. This beach had existing hard coastal defences, road, car park and dwellings, which may have lead planners' to believe that the change would not impact upon beach users' enjoyment.However, a change in coastal scenery was expressed by 79% of those surveyed, using the perceptual approach, whilst the beach classification was unaffected using two checklist models. The beach is primarily utilised by families for children's play and to enjoy the surroundings. Nearly half of the beach users had concerns with regard to the new coastal defences and were willing to pay (£1.62 per visit) to fund alternative defence methods for the remaining shoreline. A fifth of respondents were willing to pay (£1.91 per visit) for the new defences to be removed and replaced with a more natural method of sea defence. The preferred payment mode in both cases was a car parking fee. Thus, this study has found that even apparently minor changes in scenery impact markedly upon the recreational enjoyment and valuation of the beach experience.

Choice experiments to elicit the users’ preferences for coastal erosion management: the case of Praia da Amorosa

“…However, it is important to stress that both interventions are preferred to the donothing approach. In the literature (Blakemore et al 2008;Phillips and Jones 2006;Roca et al 2008) and in interviews with academics and experts, it is recognized that light interventions can act as effective short-term measures, in the area of influence of the intervention, but in the long term are characterized by vulnerabilities that affect the direct and adjacent areas of influence. Moreover, generally, heavy engineering is more expensive than alternative light intervention techniques, which are a more natural method.…”

“…Moreover, generally, heavy engineering is more expensive than alternative light intervention techniques, which are a more natural method. Blakemore et al's (2008) 2017) also concluded that some individuals have negative attitudes toward preferences for seawalls to protect properties. The willingness to pay for coastal zone interventions evidenced in our study is consistent with empirical studies over coastal zone preservation.…”

“…The context used is management of coastal areas subject to erosion and floods, in which manmade coastal defence infrastructures are discussed. Blakemore et al (2008) analysed the effect of a hard engineering protection structure in Pembrokeshire, Wales, by contingent valuation. The findings suggest that participants were willing to pay high costs to fund alternative (lighter) forms of coastal protection, in addition, many were willing to pay even higher amounts to have existing structures removed and replaced by natural solutions.…”

Using stated preference valuation in the offshore environment to support marine planning

“…to their total economic value. Beaches and coastal areas have been the subject of greater research effort, and further examples of published valuations for these areas includeBlakemore et al (2008),Christie and Gibbons (2011),King (1995),Polyzos and Minetos (2007),Ropars-Collet et al (2015),Voke et al (2013), andWhitmarsh et al (1999). Elicitation of the values held by scuba divers for subtidal habitats has shown that rocky and sedimentary areas have different values(Jobstvogt et al 2014), …”